Re: Easy discovery of ‘debian/rules’ build problems (was: Unsustainable debian/rules as official build entry point?)
- Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:25:24 +0100
- From: Ian Jackson <ijackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Easy discovery of ‘debian/rules’ build problems (was: Unsustainable debian/rules as official build entry point?)
Ben Finney writes ("Easy discovery of ‘debian/rules’ build problems (was: Unsustainable debian/rules as official build entry point?)"):
> From the rest of your message I infer that the mention of “one consumer”
> there refers to (current or future) ‘dpkg-buildpackage’, is that correct?
> Ian Jackson <ijackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Important consequences of my views include:
> > * The package-provided rules interface needs to remain managed as part
> > of policy (and to continue to have a controlled approach to updates,
> > etc.).
> > * The interface is not *defined by* dpkg-buildpackage: ie it is still
> > possible for dpkg-buildpackage to have a bug where it does not
> > implement the de-jure interface.
> > * Packages may still need to work around bugs in old versions of
> > dpkg-buildpackage; conversely, new versions of dpkg-buildpackage may
> > need to work around bugs in old packages.
> > * For a long time, packages should try to be compatible with old
> > builders which invoke rules directly, even old builders other than
> > dpkg-buildpackage.
> I had been under the impression the build tools (SBuild, PBuilder, etc.)
> invoke ‘debian/rules’ directly, and so are a good way to test that
> compatibility. Evidently that impression is wrong, and the use of those
> build tools is not helping to find such bugs.
I think some of those tools may invoke rules directly some of the
time. I haven't done a survey.
> What tools exist to allow package maintainers – as many as possible – to
> get easy (automatic?) notification when the package they maintain is not
> presenting a compatible ‘debian/rules’ build interface?
I'm not aware of anything.
Ian Jackson <ijackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.